Talk:Open Biology

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Academic Journals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Academic Journals on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Academic JournalsWikipedia:WikiProject Academic JournalsTemplate:WikiProject Academic JournalsAcademic Journal articles
See WikiProject Academic Journals' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

Open Access Stub‑class Low‑importance

Open Biology is part of WikiProject Open Access, a collaborative attempt at improving the coverage of topics related to Open Access and at improving other articles with the help of materials from Open Access sources. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Open AccessWikipedia:WikiProject Open/Open access task forceTemplate:WikiProject Open AccessOpen access articles

Stub

This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Open Access to-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Creative Commons licensing (to replace Creative Commons license); Creative Commons Attribution License (currently a redirect), reproducible research (currently a redirect), supplementary material. Scholarly Open Access (currently a redirect)
Cleanup : Access2Research
Stubs : de-stub articles in Category:Stub-Class Open access articles.
Other : add {{WikiProject Open Access}} to talk pages of related articles, and assess;
- Check media files uploaded by the Open Access Media Importer for missing or incomplete categorization or lack of descriptions, or put the files into suitable Wikipedia articles. See also recent uploads of open-access files more generally.

File:Open biology.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Open biology.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests August 2011

What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 12:01, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

First article has appeared

In September 2011 this journal began publication, though with only a single article explaining its mission. A Google Scholar search for "open biology" "royal society" finds the one article which the journal has so far published as well as two external references:

The first article to appear, hosted at rsob.royalsocietypublishing.org.
A 2011 paper by R. Horton in The Lancet, discussing the concept of the new journal
A 2011 paper by D.W.Lewis in College & Research Libraries, "The inevitability of open access", discussing the concept of the new journal and predicting that the open access model will take over academic publishing within 15 years. –EdJohnston (talk) 02:47, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good start, but both really only mention OB in passing. --Crusio (talk) 04:11, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That first aeticle isn't exactly an article in the usual sense, just an editorial statement of purpose. But my own opinion remains that a journal from the RS is notable the day it's announced--is notable even if it ends up not being published, I'll check again to see if there are some more 3rd party refs yet, to satisfy those who think they are essential. I think we can go by the overwhelming probability of notability -- it's not like a BLP of an accused person who stands only a chance of being convicted. DGG ( talk ) 05:33, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We now have 14 articles online, so I would hope this is sufficient evidence of serious intent. It would be helpful to have some guidance as to what else we need to add to the entry in terms of "inline citations" and to what type of sources. Also, I am not sure why this happened: "File:Open biology.jpg Nominated for Deletion" Can anyone enlighten? Thanks PointOfPresence (talk) 09:10, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The deletion discussion is here. The logo came from a copyrighted page and therefore cannot be uploaded to Commons. You can upload it here with a "fair use" rationale (which is not allowed on Commons). --Guillaume2303 (talk) 09:34, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I added some information to show it is already actually publishing articles. What is needed now is published comments from third parties about the journal. DGG ( talk ) 17:06, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]